[gentoo-proxy-maint] dev-libs/libaio: package up for grabs

[gentoo-proxy-maint] dev-libs/libaio: package up for grabs

[Gokturk Yuksek]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 96 bytes --]

Hi,

The following package is up for grabs:

  dev-libs/libaio

Thanks,

--
gokturk


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-proxy-maint] dev-libs/libaio: package up for grabs

[Vieri]

 
On Thursday, April 25, 2019, 12:45:28 AM GMT+2, Gokturk Yuksek <gokturk@gentoo.org> wrote: 
>
> The following package is up for grabs:
>  dev-libs/libaio

Great to see that there's some activity on this list.
I hope you don't mind me asking how I can get some feedback for another package I'd like to maintain:

https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/10613

It's been around for a while, and if it doesn't get into the official tree then yet another package will never get in either (squidclamav).

Thanks,

Vieri

Re: [gentoo-proxy-maint] dev-libs/libaio: package up for grabs

[Dwosky]

Hello,

I'm in the same situation, I think the team might be overwhelmed by the PR sent, since its increasing over the past months. Not sure if there is a way to try to improve the response time or at least mark the older PRs to be checked by anyone in order to be included in the main repo.

Cheers,
Peter.


Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Thursday, April 25, 2019 9:13 AM, Vieri <rentorbuy@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, April 25, 2019, 12:45:28 AM GMT+2, Gokturk Yuksek gokturk@gentoo.org wrote:
>
> > The following package is up for grabs:
> >   dev-libs/libaio
>
> Great to see that there's some activity on this list.
> I hope you don't mind me asking how I can get some feedback for another package I'd like to maintain:
>
> https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/10613
>
> It's been around for a while, and if it doesn't get into the official tree then yet another package will never get in either (squidclamav).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Vieri

Re: [gentoo-proxy-maint] dev-libs/libaio: package up for grabs

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 848 bytes --]

On Thu, 2019-04-25 at 07:13 +0000, Vieri wrote:
>  
> On Thursday, April 25, 2019, 12:45:28 AM GMT+2, Gokturk Yuksek <gokturk@gentoo.org> wrote: 
> > The following package is up for grabs:
> >   dev-libs/libaio
> 
> Great to see that there's some activity on this list.
> I hope you don't mind me asking how I can get some feedback for another package I'd like to maintain:
> 
> https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/10613
> 
> It's been around for a while, and if it doesn't get into the official tree then yet another package will never get in either (squidclamav).
> 

I'm sorry but we are simply overwhelmed with work.  For this reason,
we're trying to focus on handling updates for existing packages first. 
Sadly, this often takes all our time and there's none left for new
packages.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 963 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-proxy-maint] dev-libs/libaio: package up for grabs

[Vieri]

 

On Thursday, April 25, 2019, 8:39:56 PM GMT+2, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote: 
>
> I'm sorry but we are simply overwhelmed with work.  For this reason,
> we're trying to focus on handling updates for existing packages first. 
> Sadly, this often takes all our time and there's none left for new
> packages.

OK, so I'll take your word for it. Here's a fix for a package that has been marked to be removed within 30 days:

https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/11833
Just kidding... I know you're overwhelmed. We're all here to pitch in.

This package is mail-filter/mimedefang. If it doesn't get unmarked for removal then it's really too bad. There might not be enough dev time for PR revision, but if there's one then at least the deadline should be removed, don't you think?

The other packages I was referring to were c-icap (https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=900eb89a8818963cf351d27df3e1d198409bf5b9) and squidclamav. Actually, they weren't "new" packages. They were removed because there weren't any PRs on github at the time and because Gentoo had rather old versions compared to upstream, right? However, there were patches/contributions in bugs.gentoo.org that were later moved to github, and the packages per-se weren't a security risk or had serious compilation issues. Am I wrong?
What I'm trying to say is that the definition of "new" here is fuzzy.

Anyway, I'd just like to say once again that if the contributors can do anything to help, please give out clear instructions (for rookies). We'll be more than happy to help.

Thanks,

Vieri